Could spreading the Gospel condemn people?

[Neithan]

If someone is ignorant of Christ, but has a genuinely good will, they are considered ‘invincible’ to the [grave] sin of unbelief, right?

But if we evangelise this person, and they decide they don’t want to believe in Christianity for whatever reason, haven’t we just exposed them to be condemned to hell?

 

[VociMike]

The same thing could be said about Christ.

 

[clmowry]

Nah. But I’ve often thought the same thing. Particularly when it comes to promoting the Catholic Church to protestants.

Invincible ignorance does not “guarntee” them heaven, it just leaves open the “possiblity” of heaven.

I’m betting that the odds of successfully “pursuing God with all your heart” out side of the graces of Christ and the Sacraments of His Church are not very good.

So…preach away!

Chuck

If someone is ignorant of Christ, but has a genuinely good will, they are considered ‘invincible’ to the [grave] sin of unbelief, right?

But if we evangelise this person, and they decide they don’t want to believe in Christianity for whatever reason, haven’t we just exposed them to be condemned to hell?

 

[DL82]

If someone is ignorant of Christ, but has a genuinely good will, they are considered ‘invincible’ to the [grave] sin of unbelief, right?

But if we evangelise this person, and they decide they don’t want to believe in Christianity for whatever reason, haven’t we just exposed them to be condemned to hell?

I think God knows whether they are open to the gospel before they’ve heard it. I can’t believe that hearing the gospel can condemn anyone, though Christ did say that He came not to bring peace but a sword.

Having said that, I think there is a difference between ‘hearing’ the gospel and someone explaining it in a way people can understand. How much damage has been done by bad evangelists who preach errors or preach in a hateful and divisive way

The question is - do you think that this person’s life will be better if they know Christ - if so, you gotta try to give that gift, even if you think they won’t accept it.

We don’t save or condemn anybody. No human being has ever saved another, Jesus Christ is the only saviour and redeemer, and it is the work of the Holy Spirit that brings people to faith.

 

[M-Dent]

If someone is ignorant of Christ, but has a genuinely good will, they are considered ‘invincible’ to the [grave] sin of unbelief, right?

But if we evangelise this person, and they decide they don’t want to believe in Christianity for whatever reason, haven’t we just exposed them to be condemned to hell?

Bascially, No.

We just do our part to live the Word and then spread it as called. The Holy Spirit is who changes hearts. We don’t. And we’re not capable of knowing where and when the Holy Spirit acts.

Techniques of evangelization are good, but even the most advanced ones could not replace the gentle action of the Spirit. The most perfect preparation of the evangelizer has no effect without the Holy Spirit. Without the Holy Spirit the most convincing dialectic has no power over the heart of man. Without Him the most highly developed schemas resting on a sociological or psychological basis are quickly seen to be quite valueless.

EVANGELII NUNTIANDI

 

[geezerbob]

Many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[Ahimsa]

If someone is ignorant of Christ, but has a genuinely good will, they are considered ‘invincible’ to the [grave] sin of unbelief, right?

But if we evangelise this person, and they decide they don’t want to believe in Christianity for whatever reason, haven’t we just exposed them to be condemned to hell?

No, because ‘invincible ignorance’ refers to the state of not being cognizant of the truth of Christianity. A person can exist in the state of ‘not being cognizant of the truth of Christianity’ (or, NBC, for short) in two ways: (1) not having heard of Christianity at all, e.g., pre-Columbian Native Americans; or (2) having heard of Christianity, but simply being unconvinced of all of its claims, e.g., Mahatma Gandhi, who admired Christian charity, but disagreed with the idea of eternal damnation. Gandhi was in the state of NBC just as much as the pre-Columbian Native American, and Gandhi’s chance of salvation did not decrease simply because he was aware of the existence of Christianity but chose to remain true to his Indic faith.